Research Article

Petrophysical analysis of well logs data for identification

and characterization of the main reservoir of Al Baraka Oil Field,
Komombo Basin, Upper Egypt
Ahmed H. Senosy1 · Hatem F. Ewida2 · Hassan A. Soliman3 · Mohamed O. Ebraheem1

Received: 3 March 2020 / Accepted: 16 June 2020 / Published online: 27 June 2020
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2020

Abstract
The current study presents the log analysis results from two vertical onshore wells in Al Baraka oil Field, Komombo basin,
upper Egypt. The Geophysical logs comprising gamma ray (GR), caliper (Cali), resistivity (LLD, LLS, and MSFL), photo-
electric effect (PEE), neutron (NHPH) and density (RHOB) are used to study the petrophysical characteristics of the main
identified reservoirs in this field. The key purpose of well logging analysis and interpretation is to obtain petrophysical
properties of reservoirs such as shale volume, porosity, hydrocarbon saturation, net pay thickness, etc., for hydrocarbon
exploration. Petrophysical analysis of well logs reveals that Al Baraka wells consist of three types of lithology: sand, shale,
and siltstone. The obtained results show that there are two hydrocarbon-bearing zones named (S-E) and (S-D) zone for
Al Baraka-4 well and Al Baraka-14 well, respectively; both had hydrocarbon reservoir bearing oil and lie in Six Hills Fm of
the Lower Cretaceous. The generated cross-plots showed that the main reservoir lithology is composed of shaley sand-
stone to sandstone. The computed petrophysical parameters for the identified and characterized reservoir layers reveal
that they have a total porosity range of 18.2–20.1%, water saturation of 57.7–36.6%, shale volume of 20–8.5% for (S-E)
and (S-D) zone, respectively. The hydrocarbon saturation reaches to 42.5% for (S-E) zone and 36.6% for (S-E) zone; both
hydrocarbons in these zones are movable. The net reservoir pay thickness is high in (S-E) zone reach to 24 ft. Below and
above the oil-bearing reservoirs, there is a thick shale bed which acts as potential source rock or as a seal rock. The overall
results indicated that the sandy reservoir units of ‘Al Baraka’ Field have the potential to contain significant accumulations
of hydrocarbon, essential oil. It is recommended to integrate more wells and seismic data to better evaluate the reservoirs.

Keywords Reservoir · Petrophysical parameters · Well log analysis · Hydrocarbon-bearing zones Komombo basin

1 Introduction using borehole measurements to evaluate the character-

istics of subsurface formations [2]. Well logs data, such as
Petrophysical analysis of well logs is one of the most use- gamma ray, density, neutron porosity log, photoelectric
ful and important tools for reservoir rock characterization. effect values, and resistivity (LLD, LLS, and MSFL) logs,
The productivity of wells in hydrocarbon-bearing reser- were used to achieve this task. The proposed study aims
voirs depends on petrophysical properties which include to interpret the well logs data and quantitatively evaluate
lithology, porosity, water saturation, permeability, and the petrophysical properties to identify promising zones
saturation [1]. Generally, the petrophysics framework here for hydrocarbon accumulation with depth and thickness
is termed as formation evaluation, which is the process of

* Ahmed H. Senosy, [email protected] | 1Department of Geology, Faculty of Science, New Valley University, Al‑Kharga 72511,
New Valley, Egypt. 2North Sinai Petroleum Company (NOSPCO), New Maadi, Maadi, Cairo 11931, Egypt. 3Geology Department, Faculty
of Science, Assiut University, Assiut, Egypt.

SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

of these zones and to distinguish the interfaces of oil, gas, southwestern Desert of Egypt north of Aswan city and cov-
or water in parts of Al Baraka oil filed. ering area of 50 k­ m2, which is currently producing heavy
Based on the history of petroleum exploration and pro- oil from sandstone reservoirs. The main oil field, where
duction in Egypt, most of the hydrocarbon fields concen- most of Al-Baraka wells were drilled, is located approxi-
trated in three main regions: the Gulf of Suez, the North- mately 12 km West of Faris village Fig. 3. The oil of the Al
Western Desert, and the Nile Delta. Southern Egypt has Baraka field is believed to be generated from potential
only attracted separate interest since 1990 with success lacustrine shales (high thermal maturity and rich TOC%)
finally arriving by drilling within Komombo concession. In containing mixed terrigenous and marine organic matter,
2007, drilling of the Al Baraka-1 well was a success, and which was deposited in a moderately oxidizing sedimen-
there was establishment of the Al Baraka Field by Dana tary environment [3].
Gas Company [3]. Komombo Basin is an extensional rift
basin, which covers an area of 186 km2 in the southwest-
ern Desert of Egypt [4] Fig. 1a. Komombo basin is filled 2 Location map and geological setting
with a Cretaceous–Cenozoic sedimentary sequence,
which is underlain by the Pre-Cambrian basement rock. Al Baraka oil field occupies the eastern part of the
This succession is approximately reaches 4 km thick in the Komombo basin. It is located 800 km south of Cairo and
deepest parts (depocenter area) [5]. The topography of lies between latitudes 24° 38′ and 24° 40′ 30″ N, and lon-
the Komombo area, which lies west of Faris village and gitudes 32° 46′ and 32° 50′ 30″ E [6] Fig. 1b.
northwest of Aswan city, is relatively gentle to the almost
flat desert with no indications of the oil and gas activities 2.1 Location map of the study area
Fig. 3.
Al Baraka oil field is present in the eastern part of The study area is located in the south of Egypt in the east-
Komombo Basin Fig. 1a, b. This field is located in the ern part of the Komombo basin, where the discovered

Fig. 1  a Komombo concession

index map in Upper Egypt;
b map showing the location
of the Al Baraka oil field in
Komombo Basin [4]

Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x Research Article

Al Baraka oil field is present. This field includes two wells Cretaceous and early Tertiary [7]. Stratigraphic boundaries
named Al Baraka-14 (Cg 78-14) and Al Baraka-4 (Cg 78-4). and lithostratigraphic sequences are based on wireline
Figures 2 and 3. logs lithofacies description, microscopic examination of
ditch cutting samples for drilled wells, and biostratigraphic
2.2 Regional geological setting analysis. The stratigraphic sequences of the komombo
basin are characterized by two major sedimentary breaks
Komombo basin is a half-graben system filled with thick (non-deposition or erosional phases), represented by the
non-marine sediments deposited during Early Cretaceous gap in time between the Pre-Cambrian Basement rock
(Hauterivian to Barremian) followed by marine deposition and the Neocomian sediments and between the Creta-
during Albian/Cenomanian (argillaceous sandstones and ceous sequence and the overlying Paleocene sediments
shales) and later shales and marine limestones during Late due to the regional uplift event on the area. Also, this

Fig. 2  Location map of the two studied wells

Fig. 3  Google earth image

showing the location of the
study area in Al-Baraka field
with respect to the Faris Village

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

sequence has two minor inter-formational stratigraphic

gaps; hiatus were detected between Neocomian and Bar-
remian around three million years, and between Aptian
and Albian sequences of around fourteen million years [8].
Sedimentation effectively terminated in the upper cre-
taceous (Santonian/Campanian) simultaneous with the
earliest development of the Red Sea which bounds the
eastern side of the Western Desert basin.
The Cretaceous succession in the Komombo basin Con-
cession as shown in Fig. 4 generally consists of six forma-
tions from top to the base: Dakhla, Quseir, Taref, Maghrabi,
Sabaya, Abu Ballas, Six Hills formation [9]. Six Hills forma-
tion is subdivided into seven members from base to top
(A-G); also it provides the main source rock which is dark
shale rich in an organic matter especially in B member of
Six Hills formation [8] Fig. 4.
The primary targets for hydrocarbon exploration in
North and Central Africa are the Mesozoic Rift basins [10,
11]. In the southwestern Desert of Egypt Bouguer gravity
and aeromagnetic data show large elongated structural
lows, grabens, and half-grabens [6, 12]. The Komombo
Basin is considered an extensional rift basin, which
appears to be a half-graben [13] Fig. 5, probably devel-
oped in an extensional stress regime originated in Cen-
tral and North Africa with the opening of South Atlantic,
which is started from the Late Jurassic–Early Cretaceous
age and terminated in the Late Cretaceous by the Syrian
Arc inversion in southern Egypt [14]. This rift basin is filled
with sedimentary sequences that reach 4 km thick ranging
from non-marine lacustrine facies to fully marine systems
Fig. 4. The main bounding fault of the Komombo Basin is
located to the northeast and trending NW–SE, while the
subordinate faults are mainly synthetic and of the same
trend [6, 13] Fig. 5.

3 Materials and methods

Understanding and knowing the subsurface comes pri-

marily from drilling, which is a very expensive process.
Wireline logging offers an opportunity to determine the
composition, variability and physical properties of the
rocks around the well, thereby enabling a proper good
method for the understanding of subsurface at a cheaper
cost.

3.1 Available data

The Wireline logs data for this study were collected from
Ganoub El Wadi Petroleum Holding Company. The avail-
able drilled boreholes are Al Baraka-4 and Al Baraka-14, Fig. 4  Stratigraphic column of Komombo Basin, upper Egypt (mod-
each well has main logs like gamma ray (GR), spontane- ified) [9]
ous potential(SP), caliper (CL), density(RHOB), neutron

Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x Research Article

Fig. 5  a Un-interpreted NE–SW 2D seismic section (05-01-Cf 77-08) crossing the Komombo basin, Upper Egypt. b Interpreted NE–SW 2D
seismic section showing the half-graben basin and the main seismic horizons in the study area [13]

(NPHI), photoelectric effect (PEE), resistivity logs [deep to obtain water saturation. After obtaining water satura-
resistivity (LLD), shallow resistivity (LLS), medium resistivity tion, both oil and gas saturation can be calculated.
(LLM)]. These logs are used for calculating the petrophysi- The procedure for calculation of petrophysical param-
cal parameters as no core data is available; these logs are eters are as follows:
delivered as soft copies (Las files (as shown in Table 1. The
Techlog version 2015.1 and Petrel version 2015.5 software
was used to integrate all the available data to interpret 3.2.1 Lithology determination
and compute the input of the different petrophysical prop-
erties to deliver a more realistic and accurate formation The lithology identification is pivotal for reservoir char-
evaluation. acterization because all of the Petrophysical parameters,
such as porosity and permeability depend on facies type.
3.2 Methods Besides, fluid saturations directly depend on facies types
[15]. In this study, lithology across Al Baraka wells was
Generally, the wireline logs like GR, SP, and caliper logs identified by using gamma ray (GR) log, photoelectric fac-
were used for the correlation of depth and identification tors (PEF) Table 2. Cross-plots are used to define lithology
of permeable zones in addition to identifying the same and petrophysical parameters using different types of logs.
facies in the wells, which have a lack of core data. Porosity Neutron–density–gamma ray and also density–photoelec-
logs as (density logs, neutron logs, sonic logs) were used to tric effect–gamma ray cross-plots indicate lithology and
calculate porosity at each point. Resistivity logs were used porosity of the formation [1].

Table 1  The available open hole wireline logs and [surface temperature (ST), bottom hole temperature (BHT)] for the two studied wells
Well name Available well logs ST (DegF) BHT (DegF)

Al Baraka-4 GR, Caliper, BSZ, SP, RHOB, NPHI, PE, LLS, LLD and MSFL 80 160
Al Baraka-14 65 165

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

Table 2  Photoelectric parameters for common lithology in sedi- quality. In this study, the volume of shale was estimated
mentary rock [16] using a gamma ray logs method as the following equa-
Lithology Sandstone Dolomite Shale Limestone Anhydrite tion [19]:

PEF value 1.8–2 3.14–4 1.8–6 5 5 IGR = (GR log −GR min)∕(GR max − GR min) (1)
barns/
electron where IGR = Gamma ray Index, GRlog = gamma ray reading
of the formation, GRmin = minimum gamma ray, maximum
density log reading, IGR = Vsh in the linear model.
3.2.2 Reservoir identification

The reservoir is the only zone, which is the potential for 3.2.5 Net to gross ratio (h/H)
economic interest because it contains storage space for
fluid (hydrocarbon or water) to accumulate. A good res- It is very important to determine net pay thickness to cal-
ervoir rock must be a good porous, permeable and con- culate original hydrocarbon in place. NTG is the ratio of the
tains hydrocarbon as well [17]. In this study, reservoir rock thickness of sand bearing hydrocarbon to the total thick-
was identified using the interpretation of the available log ness of sand formation [16]. It shows the volume of shale
data. The gamma ray log was used in the identification of present in the reservoir. Net reservoir thickness (h) can be
reservoir rock based on the fact that the sandstone res- calculated by using the following formula:
ervoir exhibits very low radioactivity because of the low h = H−hshale , (2)
content of radioactive elements. Resistivity logs were
also used in the sense that reservoir zones exhibit rela- where H = The gross reservoir thickness, hshale = The thick-
tively higher resistivity values than non-reservoir zones. nesses of the shale and Net/Gross = h/H.
Based on neutron and density logs, reservoir rock was also
marked by the presence of neutron–density crossover [1,
3.2.6 Porosity estimation
16].
Porosity is a very important parameter for the characteri-
zation of the reservoir rock as it is used to describe the
3.2.3 Fluid identification
amount of open space filled with fluid (hydrocarbon or
water). In this study, total porosity and effective porosity
It is very important to identify the interval zone and the
were calculated as the following:
type of fluid in the reservoir rock, because reservoirs may
contain hydrocarbon (oil and gas), non-hydrocarbon fluid
A. Total porosity calculation
(water), or both. For a reservoir to contain hydrocarbons,
so the zone should be porous with resistivity values higher
By the combination of neutron–density logs, the total
than those of water-bearing zones [18]. In this study, the
porosity within reservoirs interval was determined. The
resistivity log and neutron–density log were used to iden-
equation to compute the total porosity from neutron and
tify hydrocarbon and non-hydrocarbon-bearing intervals.
density logs that may be expressed as:
Hydrocarbons are poor conductors than water and hence
show higher resistivity than water-bearing intervals. 𝛷tot = (𝛷N + 𝛷D )∕2 (3)
Based on neutron and density crossover, the gas zone is
expected to show a wider negative separation due to low where ФN= Neutron porosity, ФD= Density porosity, which
density and low hydrogen index of gas, while the oil zone is calculated from this equation [20]:
is also expected to show relatively low negative separa- 𝛷D = (𝜌ma − 𝜌b)∕(𝜌ma − 𝜌f ) [18] (4)
tion because of relatively high density and hydrogen index
compared to gas. A very low separation also was observed where ρb: bulk density which includes both fluid and rock
in the water zone due to higher density and higher hydro- (read directly from the log), ρf: density of the saturating
gen index in water. fluid, ρma: density of the rock matrix, φ: porosity.
According to Baker (21), the criteria for classifying poros-
ity is as follows: ∅ < 0.05 = Negligible; 0.05 < ∅ < 0.1 = Poor;
3.2.4 Volume of shale (Vsh) calculation 0 . 1 < ∅ < 0 . 1 5 = Fa i r ; 0 . 1 5 < ∅ < 0 . 2 5 = G o o d ;
0.25 < ∅ < 0.30 = Very good, ∅ > 0.30 = Excellent [21].
Calculation of shale volume is crucial because it helps to
calculate formation porosity, fluid content, and overall rock B. Determination of effective porosity

Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x Research Article

The effective porosity is usually based on an adjustment is a ratio of the uninvaded zone and flushed zone which
of total porosity by means of estimated shale volume. The estimated by the following equation:
equation to compute effective porosity may be expressed
as [22]:
Hcmov index = SW∕Sox (8)
where Sox = water saturation of the flushed zone, which is
�eff = �T − [�sh ∗ Vsh] (5)
calculated from this equation (­ Sxon = (a * R
­ mf )/(φm * R
­ xo))
where ∅eff = effective porosity, ∅ T = total porosity, [23], a = tortuosity exponent, n = saturation exponent,
∅sh = porosity reading in a shale zone, Vsh = Shale volume. Rmf = mud filtrate resistivity at formation temperature,
φ = porosity, m = cementation exponent, Rxo = resistivity
3.2.7 Water saturation calculation of the flushed zone.

Water saturation can be defined as the ratio of water vol- 3.2.10 Net pay
ume to pore volume. It is calculated by porosity and resis-
tivity logs. Determining water saturation is crucial because Net pay thickness is the most important factor to calcu-
hydrocarbon saturation can be calculated from water satu- late hydrocarbon in place calculations because it affects
ration. In this study, Archie’s model is used to calculate the reservoir management and reservoir productivity. Table 3
water saturation of the reservoir rocks. To calculate water shows the applied cutoffs in this study.
saturation from Archie’s model, the following equation was
used [23]:

Sw = (a ∗ Rw)∕(Rt ∗ 𝜑m) )1∕n (6) 4 Results

where Sw = water saturation of the uninvaded zone, 4.1 Qualitative analysis
a = tortuosity exponent, n = saturation exponent, Rw = for-
mation water resistivity at formation temperature, 4.1.1 Lithology and potential reservoir identification
φ = porosity, m = cementation exponent, Rt = true forma-
tion resistivity. The petrophysical analysis of well logs and according to
the low gamma ray response, photoelectric effect values
3.2.8 Hydrocarbon saturation and neutron and density crossover, we recognize the main
lithology of Al Baraka wells, which consist of three types
Hydrocarbon saturation (Sh) is the percentage of pore vol- of lithology: sand, shale and siltstone. Generally, the neu-
ume in a formation occupied by hydrocarbon. In this study, tron–density logs combination and resistivity logs (MSFL
the hydrocarbon saturation was determined by subtract- and LLD) were used for the identification and characteriza-
ing the value of water saturation from 100%. Hydrocarbon tion of various fluids in the reservoir zone. After well log
saturation (uninvaded zone) percentage Sh is given as interpretation and eliminate uninterested zones (high
gamma ray and low deep resistivity). There are two main
Sh = (100 − Sw)% (7)
permeable interesting zones identified, One for AB-4 well
named (S-E) and other for AB-14 well named (S-D) Figs. 6
3.2.9 Hydrocarbon movability index calculation and 9. These zones were characterized by the low gamma
ray response, relatively high porosity, neutron–density
The Sw/Sxo value is equal or greater than 1.0 indicates that crossover, and high resistivity value Figs. 12 and 13. The
hydrocarbon is not moveable if the value is less than 0.7 photoelectric effect values in Tables 2 and 4 and neutron-
indicate a moveable hydrocarbon condition [19]. Archie’s density response show the dominant reservoir lithology is
formula has been used for the calculation of the hydrocar- from shaley sandstone to sandstone. Also, the generated
bon movability index. The hydrocarbon movability index cross-plots indicate that the main lithology is sandstone

Table 3  The applied cutoffs for Categories Vsh Vsh and porosity Vsh, porosity and
net pay calculations water saturation

Cutoff equation 0% ≤ Vsh ≤ 45% 10% ≤ Ø > 50% 0% ≤ Sw ≤ 60%

0% ≤ Vsh ≤ 45% 10% ≤ Ø > 50%
0% ≤ Vsh ≤ 45%
Zone name after the cutoff Net sand Net reservoir Pay zone

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

Fig. 6  The interval depth with the Composite log response and lithology interpretation of the hydrocarbon-bearing zone (S-E) in Al
Baraka-4 well

Table 4  Summary of two sandstone main reservoir zones identified from well logs data
Well name Main reser- Type of reservoir Type of hydrocar- Zone name Thickness (ft) Formation name Photoelectric
voir internal lithology bons effect value range
(ft) (b/e)

Al Baraka-4 4377–4451 Shaley Sandstone Oil S-E 74 Six Hills Fm 1.89–3.84

Al Baraka-14 4962–4973 Sandstone S-D 10 1.78–2.95

in the S-D zone Figs. 10 and 11 and shaley sandstone in part. The average total and effective porosity results
S-E zone Figs. 7 and 8. The reason for categorizing the two of the delineated in S-E and S-D reservoir zones range
sand units as two different potential reservoir zones were from 14.3 to 17.1% and 18.2 to 20.2%, respectively. The
based on eliminating thick shale beds between reservoirs average shale volume estimated from the gamma ray
and low value of deep resistivity so as to reduce the effect log was found to be 0.20 (v/v) and 0.085 (v/v) for S-E
of both increasing shale volume and high-water saturation and S-D, respectively. The calculated value of average
when computing other petrophysical parameters. water saturation from the arhi equation is 57.5% for
S-E and 36.4% for S-D. On the other hand, we used the
4.2 Quantitative analysis average water saturation values to estimate the value
of hydrocarbon saturation, which is ranged from 42.5%
The two reservoir zones have been selected across Al for S-E and 63.6% for the S-D zone; these hydrocarbons
Baraka wells interpretations lie at depth interval from have movability index low than 0.7 and is between 0.58
4377 to 4451 ft for S-E zone and from 4962 to 4973 ft and 0.61. After applying cutoff in Table 3, the net pay
for S-D zone with thicknesses ranging from 74 to 10 ft, thickness range from 8ft for the S-D zone to 24 ft for the
respectively, Figs. 6 and 9. The two selected zones were S-E zone. All petrophysical parameters estimated for the
analyzed quantitatively to estimate the values of shale hydrocarbon-bearing zones and net pay are shown in
volume, porosity, and water saturation, net pay by using Tables 5 and 6 and Figs. 12 and 13.
empirical formulas as described in the methodology

Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x Research Article

Fig. 7  Density–neutron–gamma ray cross-plot of the main reservoir (S-E zone) in Al Baraka - 4 well

5 Discussions from 0.94 to 0.95 Table 5. Al Baraka-4 well cross-plots

in Figs. 7 and 8 shows that the porosity is ranging from
5.1 Petrophysical parameters assessment 12 to 25% and also show that gamma ray value mostly
from qualitative analysis is low; so, this proves the S-E reservoir zone contains
mostly highly porous sandstone, but in Al Barka-14 well
The well logs analysis of Al Baraka wells indicates that the cross-plots in Figs. 10 and 11 show that the porosity
subsurface lithostratigraphy consists of three types of is ranging from 17 to 22% and also show that gamma
lithology, which are sand and shale interbedding. Based ray value is low; so, this proves the S-D reservoir zone
on the interpretation of wireline logs, there are two perme- contains mostly porous sandstone. The average total
able interesting zones considered as the main potential porosity results of the delineated in S-E and S-D reservoir
reservoirs identified and evaluated, both in Six Hills Fm zones ranging from 18.2 to 20.2%, respectively, which
of lower cretaceous, One for AB-4 well named (S-E) and indicates that the reservoir quality ranges from moder-
other for AB-14 well named (S-D). Neutron–density and ate to good porosity. The average shale volume is 0.20
density–photoelectric effect cross-plots strongly show the (v/v) and 0.085 (v/v) for S-E and S-D, respectively, that
dominant reservoir lithology is Shaley sandstone to sand- reveal to the low distribution of low permeable shale
stone. The location shale formation related to the identi- content in the reservoir zones. The estimated value of
fied reservoirs could thus be potential source rock or act average water saturation is 57.5% for S-E and 36.4% for
as a seal rock. S-D, which indicates that the proportion of void space
occupied by water is low consequently with high hydro-
5.2 Petrophysical parameters assessment carbon saturation (42.5% for S-E and 63.6% for S-D zone).
from quantitative analysis The net pay zone thickness ranges from 8 to 24 ft and
characterized by high hydrocarbon saturation, good
The two reservoir zones have been selected across Al porosity, very low shale volume that leading to high
Baraka wells interpretations lie at depth interval from hydrocarbon production Tables 5 and 6. Related to the
4377 to 4973 ft with the high net to gross value ranging values of the mobility index, the hydrocarbon-bearing

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

Fig. 8  Density–photoelectric effect-gamma ray cross-plot of the main reservoir (S-E zone) in Al Baraka-4 well

Fig. 9  The interval depth with the Composite log response and lithology interpretation of the hydrocarbon-bearing zone (S-D) in Al
Baraka-14 well

Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x Research Article

Table 6  Summary of averages computed petrophysical parameters

Avg SW (v/v) Avg So (v/v) SW/SXO (v/v) Net pay (ft)

for the net pay of two identified hydrocarbon-bearing zones
Zone Net pay Av_Shale Av_ Av_ Av_Hyd-

24
8
name (ft) volume Porosity Water robon
(v/v) (v/v) satura- saturation
tion (v/v) (v/v)

S-D 24 0.189 0.19 0.281 0.719

0.583
0.615
S-E 8 0.083 0.199 0.279 0.721

0.425 reservoir is distinguished by high movability as shown

0.636 in Table 5 and Figs. 12 and 13.
0.575
0.364

6 Conclusion
Avg shale

Generally, by considering all parameters such as perme-

volume
Table 5  Summary of sum and averages of computed petrophysical parameters for the identified hydrocarbon-bearing zones

able zone identify, reservoir thickness, shale volume,

0.201
0.085
(v/v)

porosity, water saturation, net pay thickness and hydro-

carbon saturation from the log analysis performed in this
Effective

study, there are two hydrocarbon-bearing reservoirs pre-

porosity

0.1429
0.1711

sent in Six Hills Fm of the lower cretaceous age, which

(v/v)

named as S-E zone in AB-4 well and S-D zone in AB-14

well with varying thicknesses identified and evaluated.
Formation name Zone name Interval (ft) Gross (ft) Net (ft) N/G (v/v) Average
porosity

Different cross-plots are constructed (neutron–den-

0.182
0.201
(v/v)

sity and photoelectric effect–density cross-plots) to

display the reservoir lithology. These cross-plots with
also well log analysis reflect that the lithology in S-E
and S-D zone varies in the available wells from shaley
0.94
0.95

sandstone to sandstone. The hydrocarbon zones were

proven by petrophysical analyses that show high poros-
9.5

ity, low water saturation, low shale volume, and high

70

net–to–gross ratio. Based on petrophysical parameters

obtained, the two selected reservoir zones have moder-
ate to good porosity of 18.2% to 20.1%, the low effect of
4377–4451 74
4962–4973 10

shale distribution (20% to 8.5%), whereas average hydro-

carbon saturation ranged from 42 to 57% with high mov-
ability. The study reveals that the hydrocarbon-bearing
reservoir is the potential for commercial oil production
and accumulation, essential oil. Below and above the
oil-bearing reservoirs, there is a thick shale bed which is
acted as potential source rock or as a seal rock.
S-D
S-E
Al Baraka-4 Six Hills
Al Baraka-14
Well name

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

Fig. 10  Density–neutron–gamma ray cross-plot of the main reservoir (S-D zone) in Al Baraka -14 well

Vol:.(1234567890)
SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x Research Article

Fig. 11  Density–photoelectric effect–gamma ray cross-plot of the main reservoir (S-D zone) in Al Baraka -14 well

Fig. 12  Digitizing of calculated petrophysical parameters of the main reservoir (S-E zone) along the Al Baraka-4 well

Vol.:(0123456789)
Research Article SN Applied Sciences (2020) 2:1293 | https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-020-3100-x

Fig. 13  Digitizing of calculated petrophysical parameters of the main reservoir (S-D zone) along Al Baraka-14 well

Acknowledgements The authors would like to express his gradual 10. Nagati M (1986) Possible Mesozoic rifts in Upper Egypt: an anal-
thanks to Ganoub El Wadi Petroleum Holding Company for provid- ogy with the geology of Yemen-Somalia rift basins. Proceeding
ing the needed data. of the 8th petroleum exploration conference, vol 2, pp 205–231
11. Said SM, Sakran S (2020) Structural analysis and tectonic evolu-
tion of the Komombo basin, south Egypt; an example of interior
Compliance with ethical standards Cretaceous rift. J Afr Earth Sci 162:103719
12. Said R (1990) The geology of Egypt: balkema. Rotterdam, Brook-
Conflict of interest On behalf of all authors, the corresponding au- field, p 734
thor states that there is no conflict of interest. 13. Ali M, Abdelhady A, Abdelmaksoud A, Darwish M, Essa MA
(2020) 3D static modeling and petrographic aspects of the
Albian/Cenomanian Reservoir, Komombo Basin, Upper Egypt.
Nat Resour Res 2:1259–1281
References 14. Macgregor DS, Moody RT (1998) Mesozoic and Cenozoic petro-
leum systems of North Africa. Geolog Soc Lond Spec Publ
1. Lyaka AL, Mulibo GD (2018) Petrophysical analysis of the Mpa- 132:201–216
pai well logs in the east Pande exploration block, southern 15. Amigun JO, Odole OA (2013) Petrophysical properties evalua-
coast of Tanzania: geological implication on the hydrocarbon tion for reservoir characterisation of Seyi oil field (Niger-Delta).
potential. Open J Geol 8:781–802 Int J Innov Appl Stud 3:756–773
2. Helander DP (1983) Fundamentals of formation evaluation. 16. Nwankwo C, Anyanwu J, Ugwu S (2014) Integration of seismic
Oil & Gas Consultants International and well log data for 17 petrophysical modeling of sandstone
3. Abdelhady A, Darwish M, El-Araby A, Hassouba A (2016) Eval- hydrocarbon reservoir in Niger Delta. 13:186–199
uation of Neocomian shale source rock in Komombo basin, 17. Ellis DV, Singer JM (2007) Well logging for earth scientists.
Upper Egypt. Int J Innov Sci. Eng Technol 3:376–382 Springer, Dordrecht, p 692
4. Othman A, Ewida H, Fathi MA, Embaby M (2015) Prediction 18. Crain E (2016) Visual analysis rule for water saturation, Petro-
of petrophysical parameters applying multi attribute analysis physical Handout
and probabilistic neural network techniques of seismic data 19. Islam A, Habib M, Islam M, Mita M (2013) Interpretation of wire-
for Komombo Basin, Upper Egypt. Int J Innov Sci Eng Technol line log data for reservoir characterization of the Rashidpur Gas
2:638–653 Field, Bengal Basin. Bangladesh 1:47–54
5. Selim S (2016) A new tectono-sedimentary model for Creta- 20. Dolan P (1990) Pakistan: a history of petroleum exploration and
ceous mixed nonmarine–marine oil-prone Komombo Rift, future potential. Geolog Soc Lond Spec Publ 50:503–524
South Egypt. Int J Earth Sci 105:1387–1415 21. Baker H (1992) Advanced wireline and MWD procedures manual
6. Ali M, Darwish M, Abdelhady A, Essa M (2017) Structural and 22. Atlas D (1979) Log interpretation charts: Dresser Industries. nc.,
Lithostratigraphic evolution of Al Baraka Oil field, Komombo p 107
Basin, Upper Egypt as deduce from 2D seismic lines and well 23. Archie GE (1942) The electrical resistivity log as an aid in deter-
logging data. J Basic Environ Sci 2:31–51 mining some reservoir characteristics. Trans AIME 146:54–62
7. Dolson JC, Shann MV, Hammouda H, Rashed R, Matbouly S
(1999) The petroleum potential of Egypt. AAPG Bull. https​:// Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
doi.org/10.1306/E4FD4​6A7-1732-11D7-86450​00102​C1865​D jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
8. Ali M, Darwish M, Essa MA, Abdelhady A (2018) 2D seismic
interpretation and characterization of the Hauterivian-Early
Barremian source rock in Al Baraka oil field, Komombo Basin,
Upper Egypt. J Afr Earth Sci 139:113–119
9. Abu El Ella N (2011) Biostratigraphic studies for the Al Baraka
Oil Field, Upper Egypt. (EREX), Cairo Unpublished Inernal
Report

Vol:.(1234567890)